[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Warren' rejection of cooperation with other repos


Many months ago I wrote this, and my stance has not changed.  The top 3
bullets are my arguments in this topic.  The inevitable instances where
your 3rd party repositories were inconsistent with each other and thus
breaking consistency have happened several times since.

The crux of the matter ...
Cooperation among an arbitrary mix of repositories controlled by
_individuals_ in a closed nature is inherently problematic.  It is
however fine if you don't mind it being broken sometimes, and almost
zero peer review of the sources going into the packages.

After all these months we are still arguing over the same tired points
and my position has still not changed.  I will say nothing more on this

Granted this page never suggested a viable solution to license
problematic packages which cannot be contained at fedora.us.  I will
then give you the solution now: The same type of group needs to form
their own collaborative repository project outside of the USA for
non-American use where it is legal.  This theoretical project needs
their own Bugzilla, QA process, mirrors and such.  Unfortunately due to
my country's laws it would be unlawful for me to use work on or use
software from such a theoretical project.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]